Actually I am a paleontologist and coincidentally I do have a new discovery. I call it "Largefoot", or it's taxonomically correct name, Largus Footus. I would show my definitive proof but I left it in a pocket of my other sweatpants.
Kids these days can't even read Standard Babylonian 😔
It's no secret that the "i" in "Gilgamesh" stands for "ipad".
But that whole argument follows the logical fallacy "whataboutism" to downplay X because Y and Z also do bad things. Just because you perceive something to be in line with a standard baseline of corporate shitiness doesn't mean it's not worth criticizing.
As for individualism, it's no secret that lemmy is somewhat left leaning which contributes to the general vibe. From my experience there is a lot more nuance and depth to the discussions that happen here when factoring in population size compared to other similar areas of the internet.
I disagree. Nintendo isn't just some company that has legal beef and comparing their shitiness with Blizzard's is like comparing apples to oranges.
Nintendo is a litigious bully and patent troll that has a long, long list of hurting the fans that love their games. They don't just settle for cease and desists, they historically ruin people's lives (see Gary Bowser). What feels even worse about Nintendo is the complete misaligned of their product/ brand vs. how they treat fans. You can point to similar companies like Disney and I say that yes, I would happily cheer on any misfortune that comes to them with the same fervor as Nintendo.
I love the representation of millennials like me.
You know, you don't have to obey the laws of gravity. I mean who's going to stop you, the police?
That's like whining that everyone hates Blizzard or Ubisoft because of some hive mind mentality. Could it be that maybe it's just a commonly hated company based off their unethical actions over the last 10+ years?
But actually though, music goes up into the sky and becomes clouds.
This is 100% incorrect. Not in terms of science, but in terms of a qualifier of what a colour is. Just because a colour doesn't exist on the rainbow spectrum, doesn't mean it's not an "actual colour".
What you're referring to is the definition of colour specifically by physics. There are other professional fields and areas of science that use different qualifiers for colour. I work with color everyday and I can with certainty say that purple, pink, rust, teal, and sky blue are all colours.
Kind of like how different fields have different definitions of entropy or different cultures have different names for snow. It's all dependent on the framework you use and ignoring every other framework is wrong.
In the same vein I'm shocked how little reading comprehension people have these days (such as this comment) and how people and how quickly people jump to align any information with their worldview. The post even said "majority" with no indication that the father wasn't around. For example someone that has two siblings, both sisters would fit that category.
As a kid I went with "douche" which was the style at the time